On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 9:34 PM, Ariane van der Steldt wrote:
> I have no objection against -PAGE_SIZE. But for that matter, I don't
> object against plain 2GB either. It shouldn't end up in a signed value
> anyway.
we're going to go with flat 2GB after all.
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 05:14:13PM -0500, Ted Unangst wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Mark Kettenis
> wrote:
> >> Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2010 16:54:23 -0500 (EST)
> >> From: Ted Unangst
> >>
> >> increase the hard limit on i386 max data size to 2GB-1. This will allow
> >> memory hungry proc
> Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2010 17:17:51 -0500
> From: Ted Unangst
>
> On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 5:14 PM, Ted Unangst wrote:
> > Anyone who stores the limit in a signed int (or long). Do I know of
> > any such software? No. Am I willing to risk the possibility of such
> > existing to squeeze out a few
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 5:14 PM, Ted Unangst wrote:
> Anyone who stores the limit in a signed int (or long). Do I know of
> any such software? No. Am I willing to risk the possibility of such
> existing to squeeze out a few more bytes? No.
>
> I will happily set it to straight 2GB, or even hig
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Mark Kettenis
wrote:
>> Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2010 16:54:23 -0500 (EST)
>> From: Ted Unangst
>>
>> increase the hard limit on i386 max data size to 2GB-1. This will allow
>> memory hungry processes to potentially use more RAM if you increase data
>> limits appropriat
> Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2010 16:54:23 -0500 (EST)
> From: Ted Unangst
>
> increase the hard limit on i386 max data size to 2GB-1. This will allow
> memory hungry processes to potentially use more RAM if you increase data
> limits appropriately.
I really think that -1 is odd. Where would those po
increase the hard limit on i386 max data size to 2GB-1. This will allow
memory hungry processes to potentially use more RAM if you increase data
limits appropriately.
Index: vmparam.h
===
RCS file: /home/tedu/cvs/src/sys/arch/i386/
